NOTES for Luk 11:47-12:1

In the Pharisaic milieu enormous attention was paid to tradition, especially religious tradition. Naturally, the Pharisaic brotherhood relied on the sacred books, the Torah and the Prophets. Besides the books familiar to us, the Jews also count among the prophetic books Joshua, Judges, Samuel, meaning 1-2 Kings, and Kings, meaning 3-4 Kings. Meanwhile the prophets spoke quite unflatteringly about the spiritual state of the society contemporary with them, for which they were often persecuted. And the sacred history set forth in the books we Christians usually call historical evaluates the spiritual situation in pre-exilic Israel rather harshly. The Pharisees agreed with such an evaluation, though they applied it precisely to the pre-exilic period.

Much here was built on a kind of contrast between the pre-exilic situation and the post-exilic situation in general and the contemporary situation, meaning Gospel times, in particular. It was assumed that every apostasy, violation of the Torah, impiety, and everything else for which God punished the people in pre-exilic times remained there, in pre-exilic times. Now, in the time of the Savior's earthly ministry, as was thought, everything was different; the former apostasy and violations of the Torah no longer had any place in Jewish society, and now, as people thought, the pre-exilic prophets, if they could look at the people, would have been satisfied. Outwardly everything really did look that way: no paganism, no open apostasy, and even no open violation of the Torah was something Jews generally allowed themselves in those times.

And the formerly persecuted prophets had now become a kind of national hero. They had once been persecuted and even killed, but now they were honored, their tombs adorned and monuments built for them. Meanwhile in reality nothing had changed in principle: the religious Pharisaic milieu remained just as little receptive to living Revelation as the half-pagan environment with which the pre-exilic prophets had had to deal. It resisted God's plans and God's action just as before, though outwardly in a different way than pre-exilic Jewry.

And it reacted no less harshly to bearers of living Revelation, as the earthly path of John the Baptist, for example, and of the Savior Himself, clearly confirms. That is why Jesus says "woe" to the self-satisfied and outwardly pious Pharisees: they are not opposing the ancient prophets not because they have understood and taken in their preaching, but simply because now, having become part of tradition, it has largely ceased to be living and therefore has ceased to be dangerous for their religion.

Any Revelation that presented even some danger to them in this respect was rejected in the same way, and even more harshly than in pre-exilic times. Therefore the thoroughly and deeply religious Pharisees were no closer to the Kingdom than their half-pagan ancestors, and they had nothing to boast of except decorated tombs. But neither tombs nor monuments bring one closer to God.

The One who could open the Kingdom to them was rejected by most Pharisees just as their ancestors rejected those prophets whom the same Pharisees, at least in words, honored. History was repeating itself, somewhat differently in form but exactly the same in essence. The history that had ended in the Babylonian defeat then was now leading the people to the catastrophe of the year 70. Therefore the Savior's "woe" sounded very timely. Only very few, unfortunately, heard Him. And then the history of ancient Judea ended as it ended. Rejection of the Messiah and the Kingdom is always the path to catastrophe. As is the rejection of God.

It is especially Pharisees and scribes, those for whom any relation with God is turned to the fulfillment of the commandments and numerous rules and standards deducted from these commandments that caused the biggest indignation of Jesus. The Real God, the Living God becomes superfluous in such an approach of the law: it is sufficient that once He has giving His law, He can disappear and not show up again. And in this case, the one who abnegates to have a direct relationship with God becomes an unauthorized interpreter of God's commandments; he changes gradually God's laws into human’s precepts (see Mk 7:6-8) and thinks that their observation leads to salvation. All this is completely the opposite of God's plan concerning His relations with men – the fulfillment Jesus came in this world for. But the particular wrath of Jesus towards the lawyers is not due to the fact that they took the way of self-justification leading to death, rather that they made themselves spiritual authorities of Israel, proclaiming their way leading to justice and salvation, teaching others to imitate them and of therefore move away from God.

It will be a big mistake to think that legalism passed away with Pharisees and scribes of Jesus’ time. Apostle Paul in his entire sermon fights against the offences of legalism, because this virus penetrated into the new Church very rapidly. And today, we meet in every confession, in every Christian community the same claims of the " key of knowledge”, the same substitution of real relationships with God in the tideway of living streams of Church's traditions - the mindless execution of rules and customs accumulated by one or another denomination during its short or long existence. Thus let us try not to violate these rules, by preserving concord in our Church, and looking at the same time for something better - which is meeting with Jesus Christ and filling in with Holy Spirit, what will make of us carriers of love towards God and towards people in our heart.

The coming Kingdom of God will require a special path of faith from a person. Jesus tells the disciples "do not be anxious," but immediately condemns the frivolous rich man who no longer has anything to be anxious about. The question is not solved on the plane of "to work or not to work," whether or not to make some effort to care for oneself and one's loved ones. The point here is not food and clothing, but hope, what a person relies on, the foundation on which he stands. Christ's disciples will need to eat and drink; they do not turn into "lilies of the field," they remain human beings. But these people live not by themselves, not by their own efforts, not even by their own faith; they live by God, by His mercy toward them. Instead of our usual "problems," they direct their hearts toward the Kingdom, which becomes the measure and goal of all their daily labors and efforts.

“You are worth more than many little birds”—for many people today these words sound like a revelation. When a human life is worth next to nothing (or worth a great deal of money), food inevitably becomes more important than the soul, and clothing more important than the body. The reality of the Kingdom of God frees us from this slavery to money, food, clothing, and the oppressive anxiety about tomorrow. The Lord simply tells us: “To Me, you are more important and more precious than all these things.” We are very good at seeing the ugliness of this world and the ugliness of those around us (and sometimes our own). But the Lord says: “To Me, you are more beautiful than the flowers of the field.” We tremble in fear for our well-being, health, and life. But He comforts us: “Do not be afraid; My Kingdom belongs to you.”

Speaking to the disciples about the Kingdom, Jesus describes it above all as a new life opened to those who seek it. But it can be found only in the case of absolute openness on one's own part. To live the life of the Kingdom, one must renounce one's own life. Not one's life-space as such, not that flow of life which the Bible calls the soul, but the attempt to appropriate this space and this flow for oneself, to regard it as one's inalienable property, belonging to oneself by right.

In the Kingdom everything is different. There life is shared. One life for all. It is not owned; it is given for use. And the measure of this use is limited by nothing except the spiritual potential of the person himself. As much of the life of the Kingdom as he can contain, that much he will receive. But it does not become anyone's own in the sense in which we are accustomed to use that word with reference to property relations in our world.

The life of the Kingdom is yours insofar as you can live by this life. And therefore Jesus advises surrendering oneself to the flow of the life of the Kingdom. Enter it like a river. And move together with it. Without trying, as people say today, to fix anything in place. Without trying to evaluate one's own states, achievements, or failures. Without clinging to anything that attracts and holds a person in this world. And certainly without trying to fit the life of the Kingdom into religious frameworks: the new life cannot be kneaded on either Pharisaic or Sadducean leaven. The Kingdom does not fit into any human frameworks, but it does fit into the human heart. If, of course, it becomes the person's chief treasure. For where the treasure is, there is the heart.

In several episodes, the evangelist records different sayings of the Lord about life in the coming Kingdom of God. Jesus did not preach in a vacuum—around Him were believers, some devout and some less so. Naturally, they all understood somewhat differently what God is and how one should live with Him. Yet in the sayings recorded by the evangelist one can trace two principal “types of religious life”: on one side, a person with a clear, simple eye, filled with light like the light of a lamp visible to everyone in darkness; on the other, the formal piety of people who remember when to wash their hands and when to pay the tithe, but sometimes forget—not out of malice, but solely because of the limitations of human memory—such things as forgiveness, mercy, and trust in God. Naturally, both kinds truly are “types,” distinct ideals of spiritual life; nevertheless, they depict quite clearly the two directions in which a disciple of Jesus Christ may set out.

Today's reading is devoted to the central theme of the controversy that unfolded between Jesus and part of the Pharisaic brotherhood - the theme of the Kingdom and religiosity. To understand the situation, it is important to keep in mind that this is not about some specific form of religiosity. The religiosity of the Pharisees, of course, had very concrete features characteristic of the era; but on the other hand, the Pharisaic mentality can be regarded as the quintessence of religiosity as such, and in a certain sense any other religiosity known in history (at least in the history of the Abrahamic religions) can be compared with Pharisaic religiosity as with a standard.

But the point is that Jesus was not the founder of a new religion. Christianity is not a religion, but life in the Kingdom, and the Savior is constantly trying to convey this thought to His interlocutors. It is no accident that He answers so fully the Pharisee who invited Him into his house, when the man asks about the ritual washing of hands before a meal (vv. 38-44). The question of ritual purity is the central question of any religion; it defines a person's belonging to a religious community and his religious standing.

Jesus, however, speaks of purity not as a religious condition, but as a spiritual one. The possibility of abiding in the Kingdom is determined not by a person's qualities, moral or religious, but by his relationships with God and with his neighbors. Religion and morality can cleanse a person outwardly; careful performance of religious duties makes a person religiously impeccable; he conforms to all the prescriptions of the Torah if it is understood only as religious legislation that has no relation to a person's inner life.

One can call this religious formalism, but that would still not be the whole truth, because the same Pharisees tried to fulfill the prescriptions of the Law not only formally; they were simply completely sure that, after carefully paying the tithe, they really were clean before God (v. 42). Jesus, however, speaks of almsgiving for a reason (v. 41), of something that no law can regulate: only the refusal to try to formalize everything in one's relationship with God can make a person think not about his religious duties and rights, but about his relationships with God and with people. Then such a person will also not attach special importance to status, so important in religious life (v. 43). And the main problem here is that the way into the Kingdom is not some special, new religion, but the rejection of every religion as such. This was unacceptable even to the "scribes" - teachers of the Torah (v. 45). But Jesus replies by noting that rabbinic theology, like all traditional theology in general, is occupied with justifying that same religiosity, which, incidentally, does not obligate the theologians themselves to anything (v. 46).

Worst of all, it is religion and its defenders that in every age have opposed God's witnesses and tried to get rid of them. So it was before, and in Jesus' time nothing had changed (vv. 46-52). And here it turns out that fully religious, learned, and outwardly devout people condemn to the cross the One whom, by their own assertions, they had been waiting for through many centuries. Choosing between religion and the Kingdom, they, as is clear, choose religion. And they remain with their own choice.

The Savior's words addressed to the Pharisees and teachers of the Torah, who in those days were usually called "scribes," may seem too harsh, just as they seemed to some of His listeners. But the question was too serious, and things had to be called by their proper names. The accusations are serious: in essence, Jesus reproaches both the religious leadership of the Synagogue of that time (the Pharisees) and the outstanding teachers of the Torah for not observing themselves what they call others to observe. A strange accusation, it would seem: after all, in the Gospels it is precisely the Pharisees and teachers of the Torah who are shown as zealots for the Torah; they are the ones who constantly reproach Jesus for violating one or another of its prescriptions. But Jesus clearly identifies the problem: external religiosity devoid of spiritual content. This very religiosity became the main problem of synagogue spiritual life in the Gospel era. Many Pharisees adhered to such religiosity, and many teachers of the Torah taught it to the people.

There was, of course, an alternative, but only a few represented it. The New Testament books have preserved the names of some of them for us: Nicodemus, Gamaliel... But they did not determine the general atmosphere of synagogue life at that time. And so it turned out that calls to spiritual life were accompanied by instruction in a life that was not so much spiritual as religious. People were taught not how to acquire inner wholeness and inner light (the very "clear eye" of which Jesus speaks), but how to observe ritual prescriptions. Of course, these prescriptions also did not appear for no reason, and behind them stands a certain spiritual experience that gave rise to them; but by that time the experience had already been forgotten, while the prescriptions remained.

And now the people are offered a life of religiosity alone, without spiritual content; prescriptions without communion with God. Meanwhile, the teachers themselves feel like masters of the Torah: after all, they are the ones who comment on it and interpret it; people come to them for advice; it is their authority in the eyes of ordinary people that is unquestioned.

Not all of them, of course, were like this, but there were enough of them for a vast number of people to become locked inside a circle of formal religiosity with no possibility of leaving it. And every free word from God, any breath of God's Spirit in this environment, is perceived as something unnecessary and even dangerous: it undermines the monopoly of teachers and interpreters over the Torah, and therefore over spiritual life. It is no accident that Jesus tells those who build monuments to the ancient prophets that they are no better than their fathers, who killed those same prophets. They have no need of living spiritual life, just as their fathers had no need of it. And that means they have no need of the Kingdom either.

In the Gospel we find no angry denunciations by Jesus directed at thieves, extortioners, prostitutes, unfaithful wives, occupying forces, or other sinners. The only class He denounces is the scribes and Pharisees. What had these people done wrong—people who studied the Law, taught others, and were a kind of “conscience of the nation”? Their gravest fault is probably expressed in verse 52: called to lead people to the knowledge of God, they themselves passed by this—the most important thing in human life. Without knowing God, no amount of knowledge about God will have any meaning.